So says Lifesite, and who can gainsay them: Shelly Glover's interview on CBC's Power & Politics is pretty specific about what won't be in the government's plan. Rather less clear on what will be in it, although it will apparently involve "clean water, nutrition, and inoculations". Also "prevention and education", although the presumably the "prevention" part would not involve education re contraceptive options.
8 comments:
There is not a shadow of a doubt in my mind that Harper was planning to do just that: stealthily bringing in a pro-life agenda shrouded in foreign aid for womena and children. Just like Bush did except that Bush had the guts to tell everyone he was going to do it. Harper loves to hide in the details and away from the spotlight.
Having outed him, Ignatieff has now put Canadians on notice and now put the spotlight on the details in advance.
Which leaves the PM with an interesting dilemma:
1. Find a way to go forward with your pro-life agenda to placate the social conservatives in order to give them something for full support and loyalty and dollars and organizers and muzzles even though he gives them nothing in return as far as laws or policies.
2. Or save your political skin by not adopting any anti-choice policies as part of your foreign aid initiative, and risk losing that muzzle.
Interesting.
Does Canada have the right to demand aide seeking countries provide abortions to despite that countries laws and beliefs. We as a country do not even have abortion laws as we as a country are struggling to move ahead on this issue. Clean water , good nutrition, and medicines seem like a good place to start. Why does Michael Ignatieff want to turn this into a controversy. Who does that help? Who will be hurt when we put those string on the funding.Let the countries work through the issues (morale and religious) on their own. We are in no position to lecture, Either way.
bubba,
1. Canada does not have the right to REFUSE aid to countries who DO provide the women with Choice for abortion - which is what Harper would like to do.
2.Nobody wants to demand that anybody provide abortions as a condition of Aid. That is simply not true at all.
3. We as a country DO have abortion laws - women in Canada have a right to Choice when it comes to having an abortion or not.
4. Ignatieff is responding to the majority of Canadian women who see Choice as an essential protection for all women.
5. No one except Harper is "lecturing" - or rather he is telling Bev Oda to lecture for him.
6. Who does the controversy help? It helps the women in developing countries who need the aid for family planning services, as well as clean water & good nutrition. Women in these countries die from having too many children, no family planning education, no Choice about being continually pregnant, no ability to feed the number of children they must bear. That's who it helps.
Harper doesn't care one whit for Canadian women OR for women in developing countries. He cares only about getting a majority & more power. This "Aid" promise is another of his "promises" made to that end. Canadian women are trying to make him actually keep that promise.
I think Iggy craves the controversy, and is soley doing it for votes. I hope access to abortion has 0 to do with the Aide as each country needs to work this out for themselves. I dont think the Harper wants or wanted this to have anything to do with abrtion and it would not have until Iggy opened his mouth on the subject. It still probably wont have an effect on who gets aide. This is despite Iggy not thanks to Him.
You tell 'em, Bubba. Iggy should do the right thing and just cheer Harper on. And so should the rest of the Opposition.
Beloved Leader knows what's best!
Funny - middle class white male bloggers thinking they knows what's best in reproductive rights for third world women.
Funny.
Typical @#$@ men.
"Funny - middle class white male bloggers thinking they knows what's best in reproductive rights for third world women.
Funny"
OK, I am a little slow but: which side (or both) is this commenter slagging?
Anyway, while many jumped on Iggy for raising this issue, it has proved to have real traction.
Because it is a real issue and as usual Harper and the gang are on the wrong side.
OK, I am a little slow but: which side (or both) is this commenter slagging?
The Liberals. The commenter wrote the same thing over Jeff Jedras's blog and specified that the target was Jeff.
Funny - middle class white male with a drag queen's pseudonym thinking he knows what's best in reproductive rights for third world women.
Post a Comment